Wang v Blacktown City Council [2009] NSWLEC 114

Wang v Blacktown City Council [2009] NSWLEC 114

Although determining the objective of the development standard was a question of law, the commissioner did not find that ideology or ideological objection per se was the objective of cl 42A(1)(c). Properly read, the commissioner accepted that the objective was to separate a brothel and a church as disparate and sensitive land uses in terms of their physical relationship and visibility, to avoid potential offence, conflict and contact. The applicant therefore failed to establish that the commissioner treated an impermissible planning consideration as the objective of the development standard.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 July 2009
Procedural Posture
Appeal Under S 56 a of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Limited to a Question of Law / Judgment on Appeal From a Commissioner’s Dismissal of a Merits Appeal Against Refusal of Development Consent
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; applicant to pay respondent’s costs.
Legal Topics
['development Consent for Brothel' 'sepp 1 Objection' 'development Standard' 'question of Law Appeal' 'statutory Interpretation' 'relevant Planning Considerations']
['planning and Environment Law' 'administrative Law'] ['development Consent for Brothel' 'sepp 1 Objection' 'development Standard' 'question of Law Appeal' 'statutory Interpretation' 'relevant Planning Considerations']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Appeal Under S 56 a of the Land and Environment Court Act 1979 Limited to a Question of Law / Judgment on Appeal From a Commissioner’s Dismissal of a Merits Appeal Against Refusal of Development Consent

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the commissioner erred in law in holding that the objective of cl 42A(1)(c) of the Blacktown Local Environmental Plan 1988 was to separate disparate or ideologically opposed land uses.' 'Whether ideological objections to the use of premises as a brothel were treated as a relevant planning consideration.' 'Whether determining the objective of a development standard involves a question of law.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although determining the objective of the development standard was a question of law, the commissioner did not find that ideology or ideological objection per se was the objective of cl 42A(1)(c). Properly read, the commissioner accepted that the objective was to separate a brothel and a church as disparate and sensitive land uses in terms of their physical relationship and visibility, to avoid potential offence, conflict and contact. The applicant therefore failed to establish that the commissioner treated an impermissible planning consideration as the objective of the development standard.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; applicant to pay respondent’s costs.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.' "The applicant is to pay the respondent's costs of the appeal." 'The exhibit may be returned.']